WEF Pushes Ban on Home-Grown Food to ‘Fight Climate Change’
🤡 CLIMATE CONTROL 🤡
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (35)
sorted by:
Hmmm....
Note: The following is a cursory review using a few (not extensive) resources.
Step One: search for same text from other publications > attempt to find original source or verify that the article / text is original here.
=
Almost identical text found published on "News Addicts" (N/A)
https://newsaddicts.com/wef-warns-home-grown-food-causes-climate-change-demands-ban/
Slay date: March 1, 2024 vs. N/A date: February 3, 2024
Step Two: verify or investigate authors > check avatars, names, etc.
=
Slay author : Frank Bergman
https://slaynews.com/author/frank-bergman/
https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/8cba3174a095e11a787c2b1268dc9916?s=100&d=mm&r=g
No other images on web for "Frank Bergman" with any journalist connection.... "writer" "slay" "author"
N/A author : Hunter Fielding
https://newsaddicts.com/author/hunterfielding/
https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/d0285a67d14cc3301b877cc335719bc1?s=100&d=mm&r=g
No other images on web for "Hunter Fielding" with any journalist connection, including "writer" "news addicts" "author"
DATA:
Both identities use https://gravatar.com/ for their avatar.
Neither avatar appears anywhere else on the web (source: google, tineye)
Bergman has a very generic "blurb" for his profile in addition to stories he 'authored', no concrete information or data provided. In other words, he is anonymous.
Fielding has no blurb at all for his profile, only stories he 'authored'. Anonymous.
Step Three: Investigate publishing bodies
Slay News
https://who.is/whois/slaynews.com
Registered 2021-10-30
Check registering provider using TUCOWS, INC. (http://tucowsdomains.com) >
Registration Service Provider: Fasthosts Internet Limited [email protected] +44.3330142700 http://www.Fasthosts.co.uk
Contact, admin : Great Britain, East Sussex.
Name Servers based in the UK : livedns.co.uk
Address on website: 63 Us Hwy #21 Jonesville, North Carolina(NC), 28642
Google maps
Note: From memory, I have seen this address and location before, including street view, in digging into TPV, NewsPunch etc.
News Addicts
https://who.is/whois/newsaddicts.com
Check registering provider using TUCOWS, INC. (http://tucowsdomains.com) >
Registration Service Provider: Fasthosts Internet Limited [email protected] +44.3330142700 http://www.Fasthosts.co.uk
Contact, Admin : Great Britain, East Sussex
Address on Website: P.O. Box 20989 West Palm Beach Florida 33416
Tel: 561-686-1165
SEARCH Address:
belongs to Newsmax (Google)
https://www.newsmax.com/contact/
Newsmax Tel: 561-686-1165
Questions:
Who uses anonymous avatars and profiles with zero concrete information or verifiable sources, but presents themselves as "journalists" writing articles on publications presenting themselves as legitimate sources of news?
Who copies texts from other 'authors' but presents it as their own, with little or zero modification, etc?
What publications paint themselves as "pro-american, patriotic, American values," describe themselves as "the world’s leading independent media source for political news junkies" (N/A) and "one of the nation’s fastest-growing alternative media companies" (Slay News), and are "designed for patriots" (N/A) and "promises to always prioritize its most valuable asset – our readers"?
Sauce: https://slaynews.com/about-us/ https://newsaddicts.com/about-news-addicts/
What publications would provide a fake or false address and contact information in the US, while being based overseas (i.e. UK)?
Is there a pattern or are there patterns of activity/behavior similar or identical between these two 'sauces'? (hint: yes)
I'll dig in more on the Slay Address, as I have seen it before, somewhere (but not related to Slay).
Conclusions
Often, the first place to start myth-busting disinfo or clickbait operations is to check their details, looking for hints of legitimacy or otherwise.
Often, even a cursory check can turn up red flags that make it easy to bring the information being published into doubt. Remember, the BEST disinfo always combines X amount (larger amount, normally) of truth with Y amount of disinfo.
Disinfo is most effectively delivered by wrapping it up in a bundle of seemingly legitimate information, in order to disguise the disinfo.
In addition, information that is presented while appealing to people's emotional biases (aka "We're patriots!) often seeks to circumvent otherwise critical thinking.
I think the data re: these two publications is pretty damning, to start with. So who do you think they are, and what do you think their motive is? To spread the truth?
Think about it.
Addendum: obviously, one might go into the text itself to check the information and see how robust it is (sauces, reasoning, style, information), but given what I've found here, BOTH these websites would go on my Red Flag list, and be treated as hostile until proven otherwise.
Also: we are anonymous here, but we do not present ourselves as anything other than anonymous. Who is anonymous but at the same time presents themselves as not anonymous? Why?
u/Fatality u/bubble_bursts u/winn
Edit: small modifications, formatting
They got me good with this, I can see the circular reporting between the two now that I think on it, never heard of either of these and they linked back to this:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/22/carbon-footprint-homegrown-food-allotment-increase/
Which certainly seems like a pre-cursor to WEF official policy in a few years as they ramp up their climate crap. (tho I could not locate the actual study I also didn't look for it very hard, was on the run. Note to self don't post from new sources while on the run! kek
I found where I saw the fake SLAY address before. It was here:
https://demo.hashthemes.com/viral-mag/news/
I'm pretty sure I found that when investigating the (bogus, imo) Son of WEF co-founder narrative that came out a few weeks ago, but I'm not certain at this point (only that I had seen it previously).
The Viral Mag thing follows the pattern of Newspunch and also CNBCUS, which Present themselves (originally) as a legit general news or interest website, before then being used for disinfo deployments.
https://web.archive.org/web/20240127123325/https://cnbcusa.com/
This website lasted from late 2021 to last month, when it published "Pascal Najadi" piece. The Najadi identity burst on to the scene one or two months prior, and displayed close connections with the guy who has been ripping of Patel Patriots research and presenting it as his own.
https://web.archive.org/web/20240127123207/https://cnbcusa.com/world-news/pascal-najadi-global-us-military-operation-storm-reality-in-2024/
CNBCUSA.com is now gone. I suspect they came to the attention of CNBC and got shut down.
I see a consistent pattern of disinfo websites being established in one form and then later activated as if on a mission.
I remember that CNBCUSA! I reported it to CNBC kek! With all the fake news we can't be havin fake fake news. Now I'm curious if they still have their Instagram acct
You may have single-handedly taken down the CNBCUSA operation!!!
And I agree. "can't be havin fake fake news" Fake news is having enough trouble already, without fake, fake news.
PS. The rubric is classic NewsPunch style: Bogus sensationalist headline, 2-3 sentences with bold but sourceless assertions about <despised group/individual>, then copy/paste or presentation of actual legitimate information.
If it wasn't for the publication title and different formatting of the website, I say this was Al-tabooli Newspunch (or Baxter) for sure. Same pattern, 100%.
i mean, "WEF-funded scientists at the University of Michigan". Er, really? WEF-Funded? I mean, he might be, but where is the evidence?
Now I'm gonna go look into the people who did the study, if I can find the damn thing. So irritating these stories dont link the actual study
found it https://www.nature.com/articles/s44284-023-00023-3
it looks they don't list the funding for the study, of course not why would they.
about to read yours, I meant to include this with op. Should definitely have done more digging on it and altered the way it was presented. Sorry again!
WEF gardening bunarchived some just in case they try to 180 and say home gardens are bad for the climate. There may be more but this was what I found on first 4 pages of search engine.
https://archive.fo/RA6ii These bus stops are a sanctuary for bees
https://archive.fo/SlZ5r How gardens can boost biodiversity and help tackle climate change
https://archive.fo/qBDCo Community gardens boost well-being and biodiversity
https://archive.fo/WuV5U Rooftop gardens can help alleviate heat in cities, study finds
https://archive.fo/eebhH Why urban gardens are a lifeline for the world's pollinators
https://archive.fo/S2swn The mini-gardens cheering up London's commuters?
https://archive.fo/3wUgM How Mexico is protecting its hummingbird population
https://archive.fo/gIWHY Community gardens can fight food insecurity and boost tolerance
https://archive.fo/AQeZv Experts think putting plants in your garden could be as effective as mindfulness at reducing stress
https://archive.fo/pF3Gv Grow your own: Urban farming is flourishing during the coronavirus lockdowns
https://archive.fo/WJ8d4 Pollinators are struggling to survive - these gardening tips can help them
https://archive.fo/ky6di This is how to reap the benefits of making our cities greener
https://archive.fo/sLZPl What are the UN's plans for developing and managing more urban forests
https://archive.fo/zlgiF Cities are warming 29% faster than rural areas. Could urban greening? fix this?
It may not be on the WEF website, but can see them potentially gearing up towards this. archived a bunch of WEF shit just in case they go through with it later, for DefiantL's and such.
This
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/22/carbon-footprint-homegrown-food-allotment-increase/
"The study, published in the journal Nature Cities, recruited 73 urban agriculture sites around the world, including Europe, the US, and the UK, and conducted a comprehensive life cycle assessment on the site's infrastructure, irrigation and supplies.
Fruit was found to be 8.6 times more eco-friendly when grown conventionally compared to in a city, whereas vegetables were 5.8 times better for the environment when left to the professionals.
But some crops have a lower carbon footprint than others and can help green-fingered members of the public make their allotment or garden better for the environment.
Tomatoes grown domestically, for example, have a lower carbon footprint than conventional farming, as does asparagus.
A serving of urban tomatoes makes, on average, 0.17kg of CO2, compared to 0.27kg in a conventional farm which would use an energy-intensive greenhouse. Likewise asparagus, which is most often flown in from abroad and thousands of air miles, is a source of large carbon emissions if grown conventionally."
So at a minimum, they may try to choose what you can grow and what you cannot. Or so they would like